I'd like to suggest that this messaging is actually the inverse of virtue signaling, I.E. "icky signaling" for snowflakes. Keeps people at bay who are icked by the message.
It's just a statistical anomaly where the collective thought was stuck in a local minima, where they thought that the sacrifices had a correlative/causative effect on good harvest/luck/fertility/rain/etc. The collective common good for a sacrifice of someone was seen as a good deal with the limited information they had available at that time.
That's a personal information database and making one without consent of the people detailed is _super_ illegal in Europe.
There's a few examples of entities like Jehovah's witnesses making do-not-visit lists that have been considered as a personal information database and such have been in hot water many, many times about that.
Yes, even though you might do them to help you personally, you're acting as an agent of the org you're associated with, and such you're not supposed to be doing that.
I haven't written up an article about it yet, but from a cursory look of the legal stuff this only affects private citizens and could be circumvented by setting up a shell company that owns your devices.
Legally, you can't surrender these devices, access to them or their passwords, as they are company property.
I'm not sure that if this is an obvious question that has been gone through already, but have any of the death threats relating to Rust stuff actually been "verified" or is it just an opinion that has been repeated enough times until it has been accepted as truth?
Just the open amount of discontent towards the language and the community, creates the perfect storm for a malicious individual to pose being a Rust developer that sends death threats for doing things that are not aligned with the values of the language/community.
If you want to, you can report any vulnerabilities to the Finnish Cyber Security Centre and they'll handle all of the reporting and mediating the issue with the affected party. You can do this wholly anonymously, so you don't have to worry about some trigger-happy corpo ruining your life.
Traficom's FCSC has been a great asset for white hat security reseachers globally by allowing them to just keep contributing to the common good.
For the generic selector naming I'd suggest "cascade selector/selectors" as that gives a hint of the origins and describes the actual function of it pretty well.
But in the real world, for maximal battery savings and therefore UX, routing any notification data via APNS is recommended.
Fortunately you can choose the payload by yourself and just send a notification "ping" without any data about the messages. But if we're serious about security, you just don't ping the client about new messages because even the time and existence of a notification can be compromising. _The user will know that they got a message, when they open the app and see that they got a new message._
I've been toying with an idea of creating a JS runtime that tries to run all code two times, one which runs all identifying information inside a runtime that has any network API's stubbed, and another that replaces the identifying info with garbage.
Most likely needs manual quirk code overlays for sites, but it's totally a solvable problem.
archive.today has a documented history of altering the archived content, as such they immediately lose the veil of protection of a service of "public good" in my books.
Just my 2 ¢, not that it really matters anymore in this current information-warfare climate and polarization. :/
Assuming US, I think that the gov't can't actually compel speech from an entity e.g. force to keep signing the canary.
Warrant canaries are the way entities can circumvent the narrow case where the gov't actually can restrict your free speech, by creating a case where your lack of speak is telling. By this framework we can then come around again to the first point.
Huh, this seems like a cool optimization problem that I gotta dig in later.
As sweeping was mentioned, there's an argument to be made that we could/should optimize for:
- longest possible strides, you can pick up speed and minimize used time
- allowing overlapping strides on "intersections", as intersections have more traffic and thus should have more grime and wear.
- back-and-forth sweeping along a stride. Like with grass or mopping a floor, if there's any "evidence" left of the sweeping, it'll be more aesthetically more pleasing.
- finally minimizing extra turning, as turning is slow
If someone has any extra suggestions on what restrictions/optimization targets there should be and the rationale for that, I'd be more than happy to receive them!
After seeing a cool demo of using precomputed blue noise with thresholding to approximate transparency in shaders.
I'm quite interested about using the same technique for colour mixing.